from Yessica Gloria

mr ismail, do you still update this blog?

I really want to discuss about being a good presenter,
because, unintentionally, I got presentation class in my university....

I dont know why, but I never practice my presentation skill for long time,
so I really need a master like you :)

Thanks for reading my message, I think I need a little miracle so my message can be read by you...

however, do you have facebook? May I add you, sir?

Dear, MR. Harahap

Hello, sir..

how r u ?


hmmm...


may i get our photos at LIA room 312...??


hoho...


it is the only one we have which can cure my feeling of missing everybody in LIA...


XP


thx b4

Hallo, my friends and Mr. Ismail?!

Hope we're doing well...

I just want to say that I hope we allcan pass the exam in LIA...

And finally got the masterpiece,

hehehe,,

love n' (pea) peace

-M@rc0-

Wishing...

Hallo, my friends and Mr. Ismail?! Hope we're doing well. I just want to say that I hope we all can pass the exam in LIA... And finally ot the masterpiece

Euthanasia is Not Different from Murdering

by: Piasti Sopandani

The ill people whom the family can not control emotions because of the ill’s people pity look, choose to do euthanasia. Euthanasia comes from the Greek "eu" meaning good or well, and "thana" meaning death. It isn't a new issue, in 1516 Thomas More proposed a system called euthanasia in which patients dealing with incurable diseases were offered a choice of a good and easy death. It is very important to clarify the values of today. In recent times, euthanasia is frequently called "mercy killing." Nowadays, as high technology environments are developing, a "natural" death is almost impossible. Euthanasia is a way of relieving ill people’s pain and save them from the turtores of their illness. Euthanasia is just same as a murder, because it’s not appreciate human life, make ill persons hopeless, and sins.

First, euthanasia is not appreciate human life. Life is the greatest thing that given to us from the God. Although in worst situation, or in any pity look of anybody, we another humans are doesn’t have any belonging to end anybody’s life, because it’s all on God’s Hand. Besides, every people have the same right to life that have been ruled in regulation. Nobody can pay someone’s life, because life only given once and nothing can exchange it.

Second, euthanasia make the ill person’s hopeless. The ill people still have spirit for recover from the illness, it shown by they’re still alive untill they get euthanasia. Even the people know that they were not had a long lifespin anymore, they still consume the medicine given by the doctor. Although the family doesn’t know, i’m sure that every night, every hour, and every time the ill people always pray to the God hoping some miracle happen to recover him. Every people have to struggle for survive, and people around them should appreciate or better help them from their problem with the best way.

Last, about sins. Not only the family who choose to use euthanasia as the way to end the ill people from their pain will get sins, but also many people will get this effect. The medical team will also get this effect too, because they use their hands and ability to end someone’s life. The age of every people is on God’s hand. We don’t have entitled to determine when the people die.

As pity as anything somebody was, it doesn’t mean we should release them from their pain with end their life, but, we have to give them another better way for help. If we see from those three points of view we can infer that euthanasia isn’t the best way. Euthanasia is not different with murdering, because euthanasia doesn’t have any humanity life.

Making References and Bibliographies

This posting is taken from http://folk.uio.no/hhasselg/Metode/references.htm

References

When you write an academic paper, it is common courtesy to acknowledge your sources. There are various ways of doing this, and here we give you one system. The list of references at the end of your paper must contain all the works you have quoted or made reference to or used in any other way in your paper. It is important that the reference is correct, because it should be possible for an interested reader to find the text you are referring to.

Quotations
A short quotation of up to 2-3 lines is put in quotation marks and integrated in the running text. The quotation is followed by a short reference to where it was taken from. This is an example of how you give a short quotation: “grammatical labels are very rarely appropriate for all instances of a category” (Halliday 2004: 199). The full reference of the book/article you are quoting from must be given in the reference list.

Longer quotations are written like this, with indentation. You do not use quotation marks, since the quotation is marked by the indentation. The reference to the work the quotation is taken from has to follow the quotation, as with shorter quotations. (author, year of publication, page number)

If you highlight a part of the quotation, you should state that the emphasis is your own, and did not appear in the original text. Example:

The theme extends from the beginning of the clause up to (and including) the first element that has a function in transitivity. This element is called the 'topical Theme'; so we can say that the Theme of the clause consists of the topical Theme together with anything else that comes before it. (Halliday 1994:53, my emphasis)

If there is a mistake in the text that you are copying from, you write a [sic!] immediately after the mistake.
If you need to add anything to a quotation (e.g. full noun phrase instead of pronoun) you do so in square brackets.

Making references
When you refer to other people's work without quoting them directly, you insert a reference in brackets. Here are some examples of how you can do it:

The theme is a 'containing inferable' (cf. Prince 1981:236) which is related to the hypertheme of the text, thus preserving the thematic progression of the original. (The reference is given because the term is introduced and explained in that paper.)

However, as has been pointed out in a number of studies (Thompson 1987, Matthiessen and Thompson 1988, Ford 1993), the syntactic subordination entails a backgrounding of an initial clause in relation to the main (or matrix) clause. (The reference is given in order to give examples of writers who have this view, and point the readers to where they can find it.)

Syntactically, one of the most conspicuous differences between English and Norwegian sentence openings is that English has an even greater preference than Norwegian for subjects in initial position, and conversely, that Norwegian has a wider variety of sentence elements in initial position (Hasselgård 1997). (The reference is given because these things are explored in greater detail in that paper.)

Reference list

Referring to books:

Author. Year of publication. Title of book in italics. Place of publication: Publisher.

Example: Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar, 2^nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.

Referring to articles:

Author. Year of publication. "Title of the article with or without quotation marks, but in normal type". In Italicized title of book/journal. Year of publication. pp. x.-x.

Example: Ventola, Eija. 1995. Thematic development and translation. In Ghadessy, Mohsen, (ed.), Thematic development in English texts. London: Pinter, 85-104.

Referring to websites:

Author (if known/relevant). Name of website in italics. Date (if known) . Time of access.

The Internet Grammar of English.< http://www.ucl.ac.uk/internet-grammar/home.htm>. Accessed August 2006.
The Oslo Multilingual Corpus. < http://www.hf.uio.no/ilos/OMC/ >. Accessed August 2006.

Capitalization in titles
It is relatively common, but not obligatory, to capitalize the content words in titles of books and periodicals, less often in titles of articles in books or journals. Whatever you choose, be consistent!

Examples:

The Internet Grammar of English,
Connectors and Sentence Openings in English and Swedish.

NB This is not standard practice with Norwegian titles, which are in lower case.

Example of reference list

Aijmer, Karin. 2002. English Discourse Particles: Evidence from a Corpus. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Baker, Mona. 1992. In other Words. A Coursebook on Translation. London/New York: Routledge.

Davidsen-Nielsen, Niels. 1996. “Discourse Particles in Danish”. In Elisabeth Engberg Pedersen et al (eds.). Content, Expression and Structure: Studies in Danish functional grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, 283-314.

Fretheim, Thorstein. 1981. “‘Ego’-dempere og ‘alter’-dempere”. Maal og Minne, 86-100.

Fretheim, Thorstein. 1983. “Perfektum og det temporale ‘DA’ og ‘NÅ’”. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 2, 97-113.

Guttu, Tor (ed.). 1995. Aschehoug og Gyldendals store norske ordbok. Oslo: Kunnskapsforlaget.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Hasselgård, Hilde. 1996. Where and When: Positional and Functional Conventions for Sequences of Time and Space Adverbials in Present-Day English. Acta Humaniora (Doctoral thesis). Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.

Hasselgård, Hilde. 1997 “Time and space adverbials in English and in Norwegian, with special reference to initial position.” Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 15, 165–189.

Johansson, Stig. 1998. “On the role of corpora in cross-linguistic research”. In Stig Johansson and Signe Oksefjell (eds.). Corpora and Cross-linguistic Research. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 3-24.

Johansson, Stig and Berit Løken. 1997. “Some Norwegian discourse particles and their English correspondences.” In Carl Bache and Alex Klinge (eds.), Sounds, Structures and Senses. Essays Presented to Niels Davidsen-Nielsen on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday. Odense: Odense University Press, 149-170.

Landrø, Marit Ingebjørg and Boye Wangensteen (eds.). 1993. Bokmålsordboka. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

Oxford English Dictionary, OED Online . Accessed October 2004.

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.

Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Solberg, Torgerd Kristin. 1990. Modalpartikler i norsk. Hovedoppgave (MA thesis), University of Oslo.

Stenström, Anna-Brita. 1994. An Introduction to Spoken Interaction. London: Longman.

Woodford, Kate and Guy Jackson. 2003. Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary on CD -ROM, Version 1.0. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sources of material:

The English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus: <www.hf.uio.no/iba/prosjekt/> Accessed October 2004.

The British National Corpus: <www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/> Accessed October 2004.

The Oslo Corpus of Tagged Norwegian Texts: <www.tekstlab.uio.no/norsk/bokmaal/english.html> Accessed October 2004.

VEGETARIANISM IS VERY GOOD AND NEEDED

by: Alda Salviana

Vegetarian is the name of the people that only eat vegetables and do not eat the food that made of meat, bird, ducks, chickens, seafood, and eggs. Vegetarianism is the life and the eat-style. Now, vegetarianism has become a life style of lots of people around the world. There are some types of vegetarianism, there are semi vegetarianism that consumed only vegetables and ‘white meat’ (fowls, eggs, and less of seafood), the second one is vegetarianism with egg, and the last is pure vegetarianism that only consumed vegetables. Vegetarianism is very good and we need to be vegetarian, at least we can learn not to eat ‘red meat’ (cows, sheep, goat and pigs), and why it is so important to do? Well, there are so many reasons about that. The biggest reasons are vegetarianism gives us many benefits more than the disadvantages one. The benefits are; vegetarianism is healthy for physically and mentally, cheaper than non-vegetarian one, and even more, vegetarianism can reduce global warming also.

Vegetarianism is very healthy not only physically but also mentally. Many people think that vegetarianism is not healthy enough because people think that we will get lack of nutrients like protein, vitamins, and get sick because of that. Well, those perceptions are wrong. In fact, protein that needed for child 0-6 age is just 10gr, for a man is 25gr, and for a woman 48gr per day, and those protein can fulfilled by vegetables, like soybean, tempe, and tofu. One slice of tempe (4x1x1 cm) is enough to fulfilled our protein need and it provides vitamin B12 also. More over, with eat more vegetables and less of meat can decrease the risk of cholesterol, heart coroner, osteoporosis, and hypertension. Because vegetarians eat vegetables more than meat so, besides they get healthy body, but also can get slimmer. Besides physically, vegetarianism is good for our mental too. It can help us to control our emotion. Vegetarianism can help us to be patient and care more about world and animals’ life. For examples, vegetarian must not eat meet, so they control their emotion and be patient for not eat meat, then they care about animal’s life more than before, because they already realize that animals have a life too.

People know that vegetarianism is cheaper than non-vegetarian one. We can see that when we buy 500gr of meat, we can buy more vegetables in the same cost. To eat three times a day, vegetarians spend less of money than non-vegetarian one, because vegetarians just eat vegetables and add some eggs, they do not need meat as their first food. We also know that 1 tempe is cheaper than 100gr meat of course. The little disadvantage is just maybe we get bored because there are not enough variant of vegetarian food, but sometimes we can also buy vegetarian food (like meat but made from vegetables), or we can make vegetarian food by our self or from the recipe, so we will not get bored with vegetarian food.

Many people do not realize that become vegetarian can help to reduce global warming. Now, many vegetarian associations persuade people to become vegetarian because they concern about global warming. FAO said that 1/5 gasses of green house effect are come from breeding animals’ fesses. The fesses contain NO2, CO2, and other gasses that may harm our earth and can increase global warming, it is more then the pollution from cars and motorcycles. Vegetarian can reduce those gasses effect until 50% (more ore less 1.2 ton of CO2 a year), it is more effective than to reduce the use of cars and motorcycle. More over, based on the research, 1ham (hamburger) uses 1.5-7.2 m² rainforest. The forests are cutting down to make a barn field. So, imagine if one man eats 1kg ham a week, how many forests will be cutting down? Slowly but sure, our rainforest will be end.

In short, based on the fact above, I can say that vegetarianism is very good for us, because vegetarianism not only make us healthy but also can reduce global warming and save our earth. So, why don’t we try to be vegetarian? At least we can eat more vegetables and less of meat, we can try from not eat meet and we can change it with eggs and fish.